Charles Murray argues in his paper, Are Too Many People Going to College?, whether or not students should go to college and if the students going to college are going for the right reasons. He believes people should head off to college to grow and become "capable and cultivated human beings" (Tyler, 2012). He also argues that these students are being geared toward a specific job in comparison to the liberal education that these individuals have received prior to attending college. Murray states that “everyone should have a liberal education rather than go to college” (Murray, 2008). Murray argues that students should know their skills and limitations before picking a job so one will be successful in that job. I agree with Murray because everyone …show more content…
needs to do what is in his or her greatest benefit by using the skill set possessed by each individual. Although money may have a huge impact and may be the driving factor for some people, truly enjoying what one does, makes putting one’s best effort into their work come naturally, which enables their true success. In the article, Murray uses an example of either choosing to head off to college and become a business manager, or stay back for work and become an electrician. Murray utilizes the electrician and the business manager scenario to demonstrate the point that you do not have to go to college to be successful. In Murray’s article, an example was used detailing the benefits of not going college. The example is as follows: If a young man turned into a business manager, it would not be to his best advantage being as he has difficulty dealing with people. This could hinder him from achieving his full potential and would not allow him to climb the corporate ladder. On the other hand, the young man has the potential to be a successful electrician and he too could be the best at what he does, giving the young man security and professional stability (Murray, 2008). Murray portrays this example through his activities, demonstrating that the scenario had upped the wages of an electrician, cost for school, and employer stability (Murray, 2008). His portrayal of this scenario and striking symbolism puts the audience in his shoes. They see the youthful perspective example as a connection to his or her own perspectives. He additionally will increase pay that could be higher than if he chose the path to become an administrator. Murray states that because of the best advantage of the portrayed person in the example, their choice, regardless of whether to head off to college or not, should not be frowned upon (Murray, 2008). As a result of Murray's argument, there are numerous illustrations of the counter-argument introduced. For instance, Murray cites a counter-argument that more individuals really should get a liberal education through college. Murray coincidentally contradicts himself by saying, “More people should be getting the basics of a liberal education…the places to provide those basics are [in] elementary and middle school” (Murray, 2008). Likewise, he expresses that a larger part of individuals imagine that the motivation to attend a university is a result of the social standard of getting a BA; this will consequently secure a job for the future. Murray states, "There has never been a period in history when individuals with abilities not taught in school have been at such a demand at such high pay as today, nor a period when the scope of jobs has been so wide… discovering the top notch talented work is hard," (Murray, 2008). By introducing the counter argument, Murray sets his point, saying that school is not for everyone, and social standards have changed the correct beliefs of college. I concur with Charles Murray and support the fact that he has a valid argument that too many people are going to college.
Murray states that people are going to college for the wrong reasons and a liberal education should be taught prior to attending college in elementary and middle school (Murray, 2008). Murray’s opinion that everyone attending or not attending college should already have that “liberal” education is a valid point. One is needed in order to choose a specific field of study and to excel at something. A liberal education should be the foundation and attending college should be geared toward one specific and loved profession. Depending on how people are raised from birth can decipher not only what type of work will entice them, but if they will develop a liberal education throughout their lives and school. Some people would say that going to college should be required to further your education and to gear and prepare people for a job. People misinterpret college for providing that liberal education piece that so many people are looking for. My father always said to me that he wanted me to be successful in life and love what I do for work. He also said that I would never “work” a day in my life if I loved what I did whether I were to go to college or
not. In conclusion, Charles Murray emphatically proves that people are going to college for the wrong reasons. He gives exact illustrations, states his evidence, and provides counter arguments that demonstrate his position. He truly gives the reader another perspective on a level headed discussion that has raged on. It shows how one does not have to hold fast to social standards with a specific end goal to be happy, love their job and be great at their job. The question asked should not be if there are too many people going to college or even if everyone should go to college, but if everyone should have a liberal education before entering their profession. I believe the answer is unequivocally, yes! People can and will be more prepared for their job, their life and excelling at what they do if they obtain a solid liberal education regardless of whether they attend college or not. College is what trains you for the specificity of your career. So, in essence, everyone will need that solid liberal education foundation to build upon in order to continue their education in a specific field of study!
In the essay, “We Send Too Many Students To College” by Marty Nemko, he argues that, contrary to popular belief, college is not for everybody. Nemko states that colleges accept numerous high school graduates every year, when they know that if the student did not do well in high school, they have a very low chance of actually acquiring a degree. However, If someone is fortunate enough to graduate from college and obtained a degree that costed them an exceptional amount of money, it is likely that they will have to settle for a job they could have “landed as a high school dropout”. Colleges are just out for money, and the only way they can get money is by accepting countless students into their “business”, whether the student will prosper from it or not is a different story. The article reports that there is no proof that students actually learn and remember everything they get taught during their college education. In fact, some college seniors failed tests that should be easily and accurately completed, and instead of these institutions getting penalized perhaps, they are “rewarded
The Digital Age sparked the booming shift towards the media and entertainment for the past few generations. The current societal paradigm that technology has molded within many first-world, and even some third-world cultures, emphasizes the flourishing bond between the humans and technology. Although the status of the relationship between the public mass and technology has been seemingly ever-changing; it’s clear that the humans are becoming increasingly dependent on technology as it advances. To elaborate, as society advances, technology will follow, and the production of new machinery will eventually replace today’s conventional products. The essay, Are Too Many People Going to College, written by Charles Murray, touches on this subject and notions the possibility of the Internet taking over physical learning-institutions. With the rapid growth of technology, online learning will replace present conventional learning-institutions because of the current state of education,
To go to college or not to go? This is the question many ask themselves before making a life changing decision. Anthony P. Carnevale, in “College Is Still Worth It,” argues that people should go to college and not rely on faulty data on the worth of postsecondary education. Carnevale is a well-known authority on education and was appointed by President Clinton as Chairman of the National Commission on Employment Policy. However Richard Vedder responded to Carnevale with “For Many, College Isn’t worth it” and claims that college is worth it for some people, but it’s not suited for all. Vedder is an economist, author, columnist, and now a distinguished professor of economics emeritus at Ohio University and senior fellow at The Independent Institute. Vedder is able to convince his audience on why college is not always worth it, unlike Carnevale, who was unable to convince his audience.
Since high school and now through my second year of college I have had one goal for my future, that goal was to graduate college with a degree in criminal justice. Not being interested in math or science, I was discouraged by the fact of taking classes that had nothing to do with my career choice. Thus being said, many people that I talked too felt the same way as I did. Which constantly led me to question what the importance of a liberal education was. After reading an essay called The Liberal Arts Are Not Elitist by Martha Nussbaum and relating it to an essay by William Cronon called The Goals of a Liberal Education, my perspective changed. An education is more than just a degree in your field of study, but an overall basic knowledge in which will inspire people to be the absolute best they can be.
They end up being basically unsavory conclusions. For instance, Murray cites a primary counter-point that more individuals ought to get a liberal education through college. Murray consciously can't help contradicting this, saying, “More people should be getting the basics of a liberal education…the places to provide those basics are elementary and middle school,” (Murray 223). Likewise, he expresses that the larger part of individuals imagine that the motivation to attend a university is a result of the social standard of getting a BA will consequently secure a job. Murray states, "There has never been a period in history when individuals with abilities not taught in school have been at such request at such high pay as today, nor a period when the scope of jobs has been so wide… discovering the top notch talented work is hard," (Murray 236). By introducing the counter argument, Murray sets his point, saying that school is not for everyone, and social standards have changed the correct beliefs of
Charles Murray was able to pose and answer the question about whether or not too many people are going to college. In his essay,"Are Too Many People Going to College," he argues that most students should not be going to college to attain a bachelor 's degree when their skills and interests lie elsewhere (240). Murray 's argument on this topic is felt strongly by him, he believes that going to college is helpful for those who have the academic ability to absorb a college-level education, it is the appropriate thing to push a student in that direction since they are likely to gain wisdom (238). On the other hand, there are students in America that learn their core knowledge from kindergarten through eighth grade and are set for their future.
The essay starts off with Murray saying of course more people be encouraged to go to college then countering with a yes and no to the question. He agrees that yes getting a education is important but majority of people are going for what they should have learned years before reaching the college level. The way people see college as a way to be success doesn't sit well with him as he gives many reasons to why this is false. The statement "college is seen as a open sesame to a good job and desirable way for adolescents to transition to adulthood." proves this point. He argues that yes getting a education is important but it's not always the best way. The hypothetical example involving a student choosing to go college for business or becoming a electrician. Then giving a example of why he would be probably be better off becoming the electrician rather than going to college to do something he may not be as successful as he could've been if he worked as a electrician helps prove his point. Murray continues to argue that the view about college is flawed that many are better off looking for better options rather than following the crowd and going to college.
Are too many people pursuing a liberal studies degree when it is not necessary? When planning for the future, people need to be well educated about what they are about to be doing. People need to base their future stories on what will benefit them the most Charles Murray, the author of “Are Too Many People Going to College?”, seems to think to many people are going to college. In his article, he discusses many different points about why to many people are getting degrees. However, Murray’s text is ineffective because he is very vague, his points do not always correlate with each other, and he did not target a large enough audience.
In the article “Are too many People Going to College” by Charles Murray a W. H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that our educational system needs improvement and that too many people are attending college. Some of Charles arguments on why too many people are attending college are obtaining a Bachelor’s Degree gives you a high paying job, college requires classes that are unnecessary, skill/talent may not need a degree and because they do not want to be labeled as dumb or lazy. Charles Murray makes a lot of good arguments on why too many people are going to college and I concur with his arguments.
In recent years, many have debated whether or not a college education is a necessary requirement to succeed in the field of a persons’ choice and become an outstanding person in society. On one hand, some say college is very important because one must contribute to society. The essay Three Reasons College Still Matters by Andrew Delbanco shows three main reasons that students should receive their bachelor’s degree. On the other hand, many question the point of wasting millions of dollars on four years or maybe more to fight for highly competitive jobs that one might not get. Louis Menand wrote an article based on education titled Re-Imagining Liberal Education. This article challenges the main thought many americans have after receiving a secondary education. Louis Menand better illustrates the reasons why a student should rethink receiving a post secondary education better than Andrew Delbanco’s three reasons to continue a person’s education.
Sanford Ungar has the right idea that more people should major in the liberal arts, and I definitely like how he put his essays into the “seven misconceptions.” It really made me think, and ask myself some questions about my major. He knew what he was doing whenever writing this essay, but what happens whenever everyone starts majoring in the “liberal arts?” It would not leave anyone else for anything else. That brings me into Charles Murray, and to an extent his opinions are my own, but some I could not fathom being okay with. I can support his idea about kindergarten through eight should learn the core knowledge, and high school should be left with most humanities and social science courses. It would lessen how long people need to attend college for their career. What I do not support is his idea of the lower percentile, there could be many intelligent people in that category that could change the world, but they did not show how much they could be valuable in their high school days. Some people could be genius in high school, but not so much in college, or vice versa. What would happen if the person that has what it takes to cure cancer, but no one listens to him because he was not “intelligent” enough to go to college? It would set the world back a few
Murray believes that students should receive a liberal education, yet they should not have to wait until college to do so (Murray 225). Murray states that a person should not be forced to obtain a college-level liberal education, simply because they are capable of doing so (Murray 228). On higher education, Murray says, “A large proportion of people who are theoretically able to absorb a liberal education have no interest in doing so.” (Murray 228). Regardless of the fact that a person fits the criteria enabling them to pursue a college degree, does not necessarily mean that they should, if they are not interested. It is more logical to teach students extensively before the time of college, instead of leaving out information and forcing them to attend a school (Murray 225). However, Addison disagrees with this ideology, and believes that a college education is essential to growing up.
If students do not go to college to learn, then it will actually be a waste of time and money, and they will not get anything out of their career. Pharinet also goes against what she wrote, she says, “There is no doubt that every person has the right to an education.” Then she says, “But not every person should attend college.” She says that everyone should get an education, but everyone should not attend college. Pharinet contradicts what she said.
In Charles Murray’s essay entitled “Are Too Many People Going to College?”, he discusses the influx of Americans getting a college education. He addresses the topic of Liberal Arts education, and explains that not many people are ready for the rigorous challenges a liberal-arts degree offers. In addition, Murray explains that instead of a traditional degree more people should apply to technical schools. He believes that college should not be wide spread, and that it is only for those who can handle it. These viewpoints harshly contrast with Sanford J. Ungar’s views. Ungar believes college education should be widespread, because a liberal-arts degree is, in his opinion, a necessity. He argues that a liberal-arts college is the only place that
Individuals in my generation that decide to go away for college may graduate with a degree but they also graduate with debt and have a hard time finding work in their area of study. College graduates are young and many may not have much experience in their field. It is a bittersweet option to go to college and further your education, I am all for it, but I am not for getting yourself in tons of debt, that will cause you to live your whole life paying off student loans and such. Which is one of the reasons why I chose to stay at home and go to community college, I’m saving money while still getting a great education. In earlier generations, people may not have felt that college was important because they needed a job to support themselves and their families. That is understandable because in the early years becoming an adult meant turning of age, 18, getting a job, moving out and starting your own family, but now turning 18 doesn’t mean you automatically are an adult and can move out and start your own life, I have friends that went to college, have a job but still are not able to move out on their own even in their